# F.D.A. Unveils Graphic Warning Labels for Cigarettes



## indigosmoke (Sep 1, 2009)

Can pipe tobacco tins be far behind?

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/11/health/policy/11tobacco.html?_r=2&hp

Another good reason to stock up.


----------



## skiswitch6 (Aug 13, 2010)

FDA Proposes Graphic Warnings For Cigarette Packs, Ads : Shots - Health News Blog : NPR

Theres the link if you are not a NYT subscriber. I think it just looks unprofessional. I could have even made better graphics then that....


----------



## Jack Straw (Nov 20, 2008)

That is some particularly grotesque and morbid propaganda.


----------



## indigosmoke (Sep 1, 2009)

skiswitch6 said:


> FDA Proposes Graphic Warnings For Cigarette Packs, Ads : Shots - Health News Blog : NPR
> 
> Theres the link if you are not a NYT subscriber. I think it just looks unprofessional. I could have even made better graphics then that....


Thanks for the link. It's weird. I'm not a subscriber but it came up for me. Maybe you get a few free page views. Thanks again for posting the link.


----------



## Broz (Oct 16, 2010)

It's not propaganda if it's true...

I think Australia has some particularly nasty warning labels of cancer and tooth decay from cigarette use.


----------



## Bunker (Jul 20, 2010)

Canada has had something similar for quite awhile


----------



## indigosmoke (Sep 1, 2009)

Broz said:


> It's not propaganda if it's true...


Actually it is, at least according to Webster:

1:_ capitalized_ *:* a congregation of the Roman curia having jurisdiction over missionary territories and related institutions 
2: the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person 
3: ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause; _also_ *:* a public action having such an effect

Sorry, I couldn't resist.


----------



## Jack Straw (Nov 20, 2008)

Broz said:


> It's not propaganda if it's true...


Check your dictionary. 

Edit - John beat me to it!


----------



## indigosmoke (Sep 1, 2009)

Jack Straw said:


> Check your dictionary.
> 
> Edit - John beat me to it!


Great minds think alike...lol.


----------



## Broz (Oct 16, 2010)

Yes, damn the government for warning me that cigarettes do in fact kill...


----------



## indigosmoke (Sep 1, 2009)

Broz said:


> Yes, damn the government for warning me that cigarettes do in fact kill...


You make a good point, but I do wonder what rock you'd have to be living under not to know by now that cigs can have a bad effect on health. I think at some point it's just a matter of certain people who are willing to take the risks as they feel the rewards are worth it.

Also, do they require motorcycle helmets to have graphic pictures of motorcycle accidents on them? Or cheeseburgers to have pictures of clogged arteries, or cars to have pictures of accidents on the steering wheels, or beer bottles with diseased livers, or.... Where does it end? There does seem to be a certain obsession with tobacco among many people.

Good topic for debate though. Let's keep it civil. We're all friends here.

I love this episode on Dick taking up smoking, particularly when they warn him that cigs are bad for his health and he reads the warning label and says, "Well, I'm not a fetus!" and when she says they take 10 years off of your life and he says, "Well, that's at the end of your life and those years are crappy anyway."

Just noticed that this link won't allow embedding so here's the direct link for those who want a laugh:


----------



## CaptainBlenderman (Sep 3, 2010)

I'm no fan of cigarettes and believe there is a clear distinction between what cigarettes are and what cigars or pipe tobacco are. The problem is the precedent that this sets, largely because the government and activist groups don't care to make any distinctions between the chemical laden cigarettes and the "pure" tobacco of cigars and pipe filler. It's much easier for political activism and argumentation to hyper-generalize and lump everything under a single umbrella than it is to allow for any differentiation. So it starts with cigarettes and almost inevitably is extended to ALL tobacco products. 

It's more evidence of the government trying to decide for us what is good for us. I have no doubt that these big cigarette companies are shifty and diabolical in their marketing and schemes to make a buck. But I think government (generally speaking) is equally shifty and diabolical in their desire to control what we partake in so it strikes me that the best solution is allowing people to fight their own battles when it comes to the consumption of goods. It's insulting to us...it communicates to me that they think we are too dumb to take care of ourselves and make our own decisions.

P.S. I hope this isn't too "political"...I'm trying to keep it relatively "safe" and not be slamming anyone's political views. It can't be denied, however, that government policies affect us who smoke tobacco and I'm not sure how we can discuss these things (i.e. "tobacco legislation" which its own category on this forum) without dipping into politics a bit.


----------



## indigosmoke (Sep 1, 2009)

CaptainBlenderman said:


> I'm no fan of cigarettes and believe there is a clear distinction between what cigarettes are and what cigars or pipe tobacco are. The problem is the precedent that this sets, largely because the government and activist groups don't care to make any distinctions between the chemical laden cigarettes and the "pure" tobacco of cigars and pipe filler. It's much easier for political activism and argumentation to hyper-generalize and lump everything under a single umbrella than it is to allow for any differentiation. So it starts with cigarettes and almost inevitably is extended to ALL tobacco products.
> 
> It's more evidence of the government trying to decide for us what is good for us. I have no doubt that these big cigarette companies are shifty and diabolical in their marketing and schemes to make a buck. But I think government (generally speaking) is equally shifty and diabolical in their desire to control what we partake in so it strikes me that the best solution is allowing people to fight their own battles when it comes to the consumption of goods. It's insulting to us...it communicates to me that they think we are too dumb to take care of ourselves and make our own decisions.
> 
> P.S. I hope this isn't too "political"...I'm trying to keep it relatively "safe" and not be slamming anyone's political views. It can't be denied, however, that government policies affect us who smoke tobacco and I'm not sure how we can discuss these things (i.e. "tobacco legislation" which its own category on this forum) without dipping into politics a bit.


Well said. And I don't see where you are being too political. Most politicians, Repub or Dem take the same line on these issues unless (and even then) they represent a tobacco growing district or state.


----------



## GlassEye (Oct 25, 2009)

I am already annoyed by the little white stickers I have to take off. They can't put warning labels on my mason jars though, all of the blending houses need to offer everything in bulk as well. I do like the tin art though. I doubt these labels will really deter many cigarette smokers, or enlighten any uninformed of the risks of it.


----------



## indigosmoke (Sep 1, 2009)

For those who don't know the difference between pipe tobacco and cigs here is a revealing video.


----------



## Northsider (Oct 4, 2010)

I've seen similar in other countries. These look very crude, definitely could have put more work into them.


----------



## Broz (Oct 16, 2010)

indigosmoke said:


> You make a good point, but I do wonder what rock you'd have to be living under not to know by now that cigs can have a bad effect on health. I think at some point it's just a matter of certain people who are willing to take the risks as they feel the rewards are worth it.
> 
> Also, do they require motorcycle helmets to have graphic pictures of motorcycle accidents on them? Or cheeseburgers to have pictures of clogged arteries, or cars to have pictures of accidents on the steering wheels, or beer bottles with diseased livers, or.... Where does it end? There does seem to be a certain obsession with tobacco among many people.
> 
> Good topic for debate though. Let's keep it civil. We're all friends here.


The purpose of the graphic warning labels is primarily to scare off children, not adults who should know better. And cigarette usage is not equivalent to use of motor vehicles or eating fast food; whereas those provide benefit (transportation, food), smoking provides an unnecessary euphoria.


----------



## indigosmoke (Sep 1, 2009)

Broz said:


> The purpose of the graphic warning labels is primarily to scare off children, not adults who should know better. And cigarette usage is not equivalent to use of motor vehicles or eating fast food; whereas those provide benefit (transportation, food), smoking provides an unnecessary euphoria.


Although if a child attends school it would seem they are certainly exposed to information about the dangers of smoking. Unneccesary euphoria? I'm not sure how one could objectively define that. I would think that for some folks a product that induces euphoria would be consider beneficial in some respect. As for foods, certainly the argument could be made that many, many foods could be regulated (less salt, less fat, etc) to reduce their ill effects, as some do advocate, while doing little to effect their nutritional value. I guess it's more or less a matter of what role one feels the government should have in directing/controlling behavior. I noticed you left alcohol off the list? More unnecessary euphoria I guess.


----------



## Broz (Oct 16, 2010)

CaptainBlenderman said:


> It's more evidence of the government trying to decide for us what is good for us. I have no doubt that these big cigarette companies are shifty and diabolical in their marketing and schemes to make a buck. But I think government (generally speaking) is equally shifty and diabolical in their desire to control what we partake in so it strikes me that the best solution is allowing people to fight their own battles when it comes to the consumption of goods.


I would hardly equate the government to a company which desires to profit off of your health and addiction.



CaptainBlenderman said:


> It's insulting to us...it communicates to me that they think we are too dumb to take care of ourselves and make our own decisions.


I think the vast majority of Americans are too dumb and/or ignorant to take care of themselves. I'm not going into why they are that way, but their actions speak for themselves.


----------



## indigosmoke (Sep 1, 2009)

Broz said:


> I think the vast majority of Americans are too dumb and/or ignorant to take care of themselves. I'm not going into why they are that way, but their actions speak for themselves.


----------



## Jack Straw (Nov 20, 2008)

Broz said:


> I think the vast majority of Americans are too dumb and/or ignorant to take care of themselves. I'm not going into why they are that way, but their actions speak for themselves.


And it's your place and the governments place to tell them how to live their lives? Sounds similar to Nazi socialism in some regards. Maybe we should start rounding up smokers into special "smoking section" camps? All for the children, of course. (I realize I'm being an ass, but this attitude just grinds my gears.)


----------



## indigosmoke (Sep 1, 2009)

Easy, easy fellows. I'm beginning to wish I hadn't started this thread. Mods, perhaps you should close it down before things get too ugly?


----------



## Jack Straw (Nov 20, 2008)

Sorry John. I'll play nice.


----------



## indigosmoke (Sep 1, 2009)

Jack Straw said:


> Sorry John. I'll play nice.


You're not the only one Andrew, and my comment was not directed at you specifically. I actual agree with the sentiments you expressed. I just remember a similar discussion that ended up almost driving a good BOTL off the boards, and I don't want that to happen because of one of my threads. At least no one has mentioned Obama yet, LOL. Let's get back on some topics we can all agree on like abortion, terrorism, or religion. 

You know I love you Brother!


----------



## Broz (Oct 16, 2010)

Jack Straw said:


> And it's your place and the governments place to tell them how to live their lives? Sounds similar to Nazi socialism in some regards. Maybe we should start rounding up smokers into special "smoking section" camps? All for the children, of course. (I realize I'm being an ass, but this attitude just grinds my gears.)


Ha ha, just because I think graphic warning labels are OK means I promote fascism? Sure thing bud.

Warning labels aren't government control. Each individual who considers smoking cigarettes has the final choice. This isn't a ban, which would be an obvious attempt at control (cannabis, anyone?). For people like you and me we already are aware of the consequences of smoking and choose to or not to smoke. But by no means is this advocation of abstinence through fear, specifically targeted towards minors, unwarranted.


----------



## indigosmoke (Sep 1, 2009)

Just for the record, I only started this thread because I thought it might be of interest to those who would prefer to own tins not covered with disgusting images, not to discuss the merits of such images. I know we are all always looking for reasons to justify our TAD!

As the Moo-Meister recently said, it's my thread and lets keep in on my topic. If anyone wants to continue this discussion please start your own thread in the Tobacco Legislation section.


----------



## Requiem (Dec 6, 2008)

Negative placebo effect, anyone? :fear:


----------



## Broz (Oct 16, 2010)

As for pipe tobacco, I don't think such graphics will be coming to haunt our tins for a while. Of course, the anti-smoking lobby is more so anti-tobacco-in-general so who knows what's in store for non-cigarette tobacco users.


----------



## indigosmoke (Sep 1, 2009)

Broz said:


> As for pipe tobacco, I don't think such graphics will be coming to haunt our tins for a while. Of course, the anti-smoking lobby is more so anti-tobacco-in-general so who knows what's in store for non-cigarette tobacco users.


I sincerely hope you are right. The giant white text warning label that covers 2/3's of the surface of the tins of Capstan Dubinthedam sent me ruins them as tin art for me. It's sort of cool they are in Dutch though! I'm a tin collector by the way and display my empty tins on a shelf in my study, which is why I created this thread and found this topic of interest.


----------



## Broz (Oct 16, 2010)

What is interesting is how warning labels vary for snus, the smokeless tobacco product. While in Sweden research has faithfully determined that there is no significant health impact (and the small label on the bottom only advises against possible health risks), the USA slaps 40% of the can with the generic oral cancer and tooth loss warnings which really only apply to chew and dip.

I do see how if you're a collector for tobacco tins that the labels do ruin their appeal. It doesn't really bother me, as I made the decision to use tobacco long ago.


----------



## GlassEye (Oct 25, 2009)

The warning labels are just one step closer to controlling it completely, it should be an individuals own choice on how they take care of themselves or what they choose to consume regardless of the effects. If someone wants to smoke two packs a day for the rest of their life and then dies from it, that is their choice; if someone wants to eat only unhealthy processed foods and that results in morbid obesity or a heart attack, that was their choice to make. Why should we lose the ability to make our own choices, we are capable of doing so. The information is available on the effects of the things we choose, using that information and making an informed decision is a choice one must make.


----------



## indigosmoke (Sep 1, 2009)

Broz said:


> I do see how if you're a collector for tobacco tins that the labels do ruin their appeal. It doesn't really bother me, as I made the decision to use tobacco long ago.


It's not that it bothers me because it worries me about the effects of pipe smoking, it's that it ruins them as graphic art for me. Just like I wouldn't slap a big white sticker on a Norman Rockwell or NC Wyeth painting. I realize I am probably in the minority here, but the tin art, blend name, tobacco presentation (flake, ribbon cut, shag, plug, etc) all contribute to the overall smoking experience for me. For example, I prefer smoking a tobacco named Consummate Gentleman or Grey Havens to one named Merde de Cheval, but that's just me.


----------



## GlassEye (Oct 25, 2009)

indigosmoke said:


> It's not that it bothers me because it worries me about the effects of pipe smoking, it's that it ruins them as graphic art for me. Just like I wouldn't slap a big white sticker on a Norman Rockwell or NC Wyeth painting. I realize I am probably in the minority here, but the tin art, blend name, tobacco presentation (flake, ribbon cut, shag, plug, etc) all contribute to the overall smoking experience for me. For example, I prefer smoking a tobacco named Consummate Gentleman or Grey Havens to one named Merde de Cheval, but that's just me.


Ruining the experience is all part of what they want, if tobacco is not a good experience then people may quit, which is what the anti-smokers want, yes? I remember something recently about trying to ban all flavoring additives to make tobacco less enjoyable. I, agree with you though that the art is ruined completely, one cannot display a nice looking tin if all you see from across the room is a big white label saying that you will die or other such things as on the European labels.


----------



## CaptainBlenderman (Sep 3, 2010)

Broz said:


> Of course, the anti-smoking lobby is more so anti-tobacco-in-general so who knows what's in store for non-cigarette tobacco users.


This was my point in saying it was setting a bad precedent. It doesn't mean that it's a slam-dunk; that it will start with labeling and soon the government will progress with a ban. It's just to say that often it is the case that subtle controls can breed bigger controls.

Regardless, the point here is that it ruins the tin and I understand the packaging appeal. I don't think a graphic is going to make that much difference over a warning label to someone who wants to smoke, as you already pointed out. I think GlassEye is right, they probably think if they ruin the appeal, hopefully they'll get people to stop smoking... I don't tend to care as much what happens to cigarettes, my only concern is that whatever they do to/for cigarettes they usually and erroneously extend to cigars and pipe tobacco.



Broz said:


> I would hardly equate the government to a company which desires to profit off of your health and addiction.


I understand your point, but ultimately would beg to differ (hence my comment in the first place) but that clearly is not what this thread is supposed to be about so...nevermind... :tape:



Broz said:


> I think the vast majority of Americans are too dumb and/or ignorant to take care of themselves. I'm not going into why they are that way, but their actions speak for themselves.


:laugh: 
Hah! Well, I would think that an exaggeration and rather subjective, but you may have something there! I don't think that government intervention which tends to breed more dependency (and likely is a major culprit in causing the proliferation of ignorance in the first place) is the solution though. But that is all a topic for another forum.

My bottom line here is more that they lump us in with cigarette smoking which is insulting and interferes with (though admittedly, so far does not prevent) our enjoyment of tobacco.

Cheers!


----------



## Broz (Oct 16, 2010)

CaptainBlenderman said:


> My bottom line here is more that they lump us in with cigarette smoking which is insulting and interferes with (though admittedly, so far does not prevent) our enjoyment of tobacco.
> 
> Cheers!


I agree, I'm not happy with how every tobacco product is arbitrarily lumped with cigarette smoking. When measures are taken to keep cigarette smoking in check invariably every other product suffers. I'm most displeased with treatment of harm reduction products like snus which is a good product meant to combat cigarettes.


----------



## indigosmoke (Sep 1, 2009)

I agree with both of you on the unfortunate nature of lumping cigarette smoking with pipes and cigars. One problem for us pipe smokers was pointed out by Greg Pease in a recent interview in Pipe Magazine. It shows a way in which the decline of cigarette smoking likely will effect pipe smokers. See the following:

_PM: We at PipesMagazine try to keep an eye on all of the anti-tobacco activities, but with so much of it going on lately, it can get overwhelming. We have been trying to get all smokers and tobacco users to unite and join in a collective effort to fight against all of these absurd anti-tobacco agendas and laws, but we have met with some resistance from some pipe smokers. It will, and does, go much deeper than just tobacco rights. What are some of your opinions on the subject that we all have to stick together?

Greg: Unfortunately, some pipe smokers have been complacent regarding the constant attack on cigarettes and the cigarette industry, and it's been difficult to get our ranks to rally behind the efforts to preserve our pastime. The fact is, we rely on the cigarette industry. The big tobacco companies make it possible for pipe tobacco producers to get the leaf necessary to do what we do. If Big Tobacco sinks, we'll be forced to go down with them._

In his own article entitled _Us vs Them _Greg elaborates:

_But, the truth is that without "Them," the cigarette companies, "We" would have a difficult time existing. The pipe tobacco industry today is indirectly, but very closely tied to the cigarette industry. If not for Big Tobacco, our selection of leaf would be minimal, at best, and the price of what we could get would be astronomical. We, as pipe smokers, enjoy a quite inexpensive luxury by virtue of the economy of scale that the cigarette industry creates.

Further, we have access to a wider variety of leaf due to the number of growers willing to work the land to produce the tonnage that Big Tobacco requires. The sum total of the pipe tobacco production in the world amounts to about what the cigarette industry sweeps off the floor after the lines are shut down. I'm not exaggerating; collectively, we consume in a year what they produce in a few hours.

So, as much as many of us don't care for cigarettes, they are really essential to our hobby, and it's a damned good thing that Big Tobacco hasn't been shuttered by the relentless pressures from the antis, or we'd either be smoking pencil shavings and flavoured lawn clippings, or paying a inordinately high price for our pipeweed of choice._

I think DubintheDam expressed something similar in the following post in another thread:

_"Coming from a euro perspective, prices are and will still be lower in the US than here. There's no getting away from the fact that taxes for baccy will increase rapidly. No amount of lobbying will change it, smoking is not good for our health and the grey area between cigar and pipe and cigarettes will always remain just that, a mere grey area for polite discussion.

The future lies in people growing their own, we could see people setting community based co-op growing groups. One thing is for sure, tobacco use is here to stay for a long time yet, at least another 50 years. Of course it is reasonable to say that there will be a time thereafter that people would just consider it a habit of foregone times and people.

The fact that we presently continue to pay the level of taxes we do and that we don't even consider the option of growing are own is actually bizarre. We need to get over this, "I need it, so I buy it" mentality, this goes to the very core of sustainability issue we are all to aware of in other area's of our lives.

The tax situation on baccy is unjust and undemocratic, but many things in life are. But I have faith in the American 'can do' spirit and expect Americans to be the very leaders in any possible self-grow co-op initiative."_-Dubinthedam


----------



## CaptainBlenderman (Sep 3, 2010)

VERY interesting post! I hadn't thought of the connection to the cigarette industry and the volume issues that make pipe tobacco readily available (and cheap) to us.

"_The fact that we presently continue to pay the level of taxes we do and that we don't even consider the option of growing are _[sic]_ own is actually bizarre. We need to get over this, 'I need it, so I buy it' mentality, this goes to the very core of sustainability issue we are all to aware of in other area's of our lives."

_Love this. I tend to agree. We've gotten awfully comfortable with our consumerism and having relatively easy access to buy virtually whatever we want. I wonder how much of the "grow your own" mentality is going to become necessary as conditions (politics, economy, etc.) continue the way they are. Most of us don't think about it in the context of tobacco, but who knows what things will look like in 50 years?

RG for you, brother! Great post!


----------



## Turtle (Aug 24, 2010)

Agreed on the great post. I really liked that; and its very true, so rarely do we think of growing - yet many other things have been or are starting to be, should be something to put together!


----------



## MarkC (Jul 4, 2009)

GlassEye said:


> The warning labels are just one step closer to controlling it completely, it should be an individuals own choice on how they take care of themselves or what they choose to consume regardless of the effects. If someone wants to smoke two packs a day for the rest of their life and then dies from it, that is their choice; if someone wants to eat only unhealthy processed foods and that results in morbid obesity or a heart attack, that was their choice to make. Why should we lose the ability to make our own choices, we are capable of doing so. The information is available on the effects of the things we choose, using that information and making an informed decision is a choice one must make.


That would make sense if most people started smoking as adults. Most people (and probably most of us here) who smoke started at an early age. They/we were not informed adults, making an intelligent decision, and pretending otherwise just isn't honest.


----------



## Jack Straw (Nov 20, 2008)

MarkC said:


> That would make sense if most people started smoking as adults. Most people (and probably most of us here) who smoke started at an early age. They/we were not informed adults, making an intelligent decision, and pretending otherwise just isn't honest.


I bought my first pack of cigarettes shortly after I turned 18. I believe my line of reasoning was, "well I'm legal now, might as well get some cigarettes."


----------



## Johnny Rock (Jun 25, 2010)

Jack Straw said:


> I bought my first pack of cigarettes shortly after I turned 18. I believe my line of reasoning was, "well I'm legal now, might as well get some cigarettes."


And that's all she wrote (at least for me), until my tastes and intelligence kicked in...it took a while

For me it was 40 years of addiction to cigarettes before I became aware of other forms of tobacco satisfaction, and less addiction. The cigarettes are gone for me now, and I am thankful for that. The ads on cigarette packs never phased me, I always knew they were killers, I just thought, well not me...

I no longer jones for the nicotine hit that the cigarettes gave, only for the relaxation that my other forms of tobacco give me now. The ability to do things like exercise and my daily job duties without becoming totally exhausted is also a big plus.

There is a sensible way out of the cigarette addiction without the help from the progressives that want to save your life, all it take is a little experimenting with the alternatives and a willingness to change.

The "helpful" group of government agencies that are determined to look over your shoulder and tell you what to do, eat, and believe, are not helping anyone who is not aware enough to guide their own life, only making them more dependant on Government.

Back in the old days when someone was determined to do harm to themselves regardless of what they were taught, we called it "the thinning of the herd" Not much else can be done about it, they will always exist, for a while at least. Government cannot preserve or change these individuals.


----------



## Mr.Lordi (May 20, 2007)

YouTube - Bill Hicks - 'Smoking'

Bill Hicks is my favorite comedian (Yes, he even edges out Carlin and I love Carlin's stuff) and this is one of my favorite bits. It is NSFW, due to swearing. Hopefully it is ok to post here. The Part relevant to this thread(in my mind anyways) is about 8:02, but the whole thing is funny. Enjoy!


----------



## JustOneMoreStick (Sep 21, 2009)

I am just waiting until some poor cigarette smoker is traumatized and sues because the warning is distressing him or her.


----------



## MarkC (Jul 4, 2009)

Mr.Lordi said:


> YouTube - Bill Hicks - 'Smoking'
> 
> Bill Hicks is my favorite comedian (Yes, he even edges out Carlin and I love Carlin's stuff) and this is one of my favorite bits. It is NSFW, due to swearing. Hopefully it is ok to post here. The Part relevant to this thread(in my mind anyways) is about 8:02, but the whole thing is funny. Enjoy!


That was fantastic! I'm surprised the neighbors aren't pounding on the walls...


----------



## Spectabalis (May 17, 2010)

We've had the large warning signs on cig packets over here for years now. It hasn't reduced consumption though. Cig smokers who don't like them just buy a small cover that the pack slips in to (usually the ladies), which are available in all sorts of designs and materials. They say it also protects the packs from damage especially if out in the rain.
Glad my cigarette smoking days are well behind me though.


----------



## slyder (Mar 17, 2009)

I dont see how they can lump all tobacco products together. Cigars and Pipe tobacco are so different that cig tobacco. It doesnt take a rocket scientist to know that the harsh chemicals are not in the other 2. Although Im sure the government has a few working on the project so they have somebody "credible" to let the people know they are just as bad. "OMG hes wearing a white coat and has a pocket protector.........it must be true".


----------



## indigosmoke (Sep 1, 2009)

Spectabalis said:


> We've had the large warning signs on cig packets over here for years now. It hasn't reduced consumption though. Cig smokers who don't like them just buy a small cover that the pack slips in to (usually the ladies), which are available in all sorts of designs and materials. They say it also protects the packs from damage especially if out in the rain.
> Glad my cigarette smoking days are well behind me though.


Thanks for the interesting info and pespective from the UK.


----------



## indigosmoke (Sep 1, 2009)

slyder said:


> I dont see how they can lump all tobacco products together. Cigars and Pipe tobacco are so different that cig tobacco. It doesnt take a rocket scientist to know that the harsh chemicals are not in the other 2. Although Im sure the government has a few working on the project so they have somebody "credible" to let the people know they are just as bad. "OMG hes wearing a white coat and has a pocket protector.........it must be true".


Good observatons. I think most of the anti-smoking crowd are anti-tobacco in any form. Not likely to change, unfortunately. And as GLP points out we'll all probably go down when they sink the Big Tobacco cigarette ship. Stock up my friends, stock up!


----------



## Commander Quan (May 6, 2003)

I think the tobacco company's should throw this back in their faces and make a parody of the labels, blends like;

Borkum Riff's Black Tooth Cavendish
CAO's Midnight Hears Ride, and Old Iron Lung
C&D's Habana Dirt Nap, and After Viewing Hours Flake
Samuel Gawith Spread My Ashes in a Lakeland 
House of Windsor's Need a Country Doctor, and
Dunhills Go Towards the Light Flake


----------



## indigosmoke (Sep 1, 2009)

Commander Quan said:


> I think the tobacco company's should throw this back in their faces and make a parody of the labels, blends like;
> 
> Borkum Riff's Black Tooth Cavendish
> CAO's Midnight Hears Ride, and Old Iron Lung
> ...


Hysterical! RG Bump coming your way!

Don't forget G&H Shuffle Off This Mortal Coil Rope and SG Stiff. And remember, all such tobaccos should be fully rubbed out before smoking.


----------



## Commander Quan (May 6, 2003)

Bow Legged Paulbarer


----------



## indigosmoke (Sep 1, 2009)

Sorry, forgot to add McClelland Three Croaks Syrian and Frog Post-Mortem Across the Styx. And Mixture 79 of course. Oh wait, that just tastes like death warmed over.


----------



## Jogi (Dec 4, 2009)

These labels, linked by Indigo are quite tame actually. We, just like European countries, have just been gifted with pretty gruesome labels, showing cancerous lips, tongues, rotting teeth and mouth in general... Not that it drives away the cig-smokers. People have started buying cigarette cases, which by the way, I like very much... Let's hope pipe-weed stays free of this stuff... :|


----------



## Mante (Dec 25, 2009)

Jogi said:


> These labels, linked by Indigo are quite tame actually. We, just like European countries, have just been gifted with pretty gruesome labels, showing cancerous lips, tongues, rotting teeth and mouth in general... Not that it drives away the cig-smokers. People have started buying cigarette cases, which by the way, look quite good :madgrin:


Indeed Australia has far worse as well on ALL tobacco products from cigarettes, to pipe tobacco & cigars.


----------



## Hfdpipe (Oct 29, 2010)

indigosmoke said:


> It's not that it bothers me because it worries me about the effects of pipe smoking, it's that it ruins them as graphic art for me. Just like I wouldn't slap a big white sticker on a Norman Rockwell or NC Wyeth painting. I realize I am probably in the minority here, but the tin art, blend name, tobacco presentation (flake, ribbon cut, shag, plug, etc) all contribute to the overall smoking experience for me. For example, I prefer smoking a tobacco named Consummate Gentleman or Grey Havens to one named Merde de Cheval, but that's just me.


I feel the same way, I have some old tins, old cigar boxes,etc. I wouldnt be bothered to keep empties if they had some stupid graphic picture on them. I've seen some pipe tobacco tins from other countries that have half the face of the tin covered with a warning, it's ugly as sin.


----------



## MarkC (Jul 4, 2009)

Personally, I thought the damned UPC was too much myself.


----------



## bierundtabak (Nov 15, 2010)

This reminds me of when I was in Canada and bought a pack of smokes. They had a picture of a cigarette that was almost smoked to the butt, the ash was still intact though and was limp, like it made an arch. Under that it said "cigarette smoking can cause impotence".


----------

